Many types of machines and machine accessories have components which move relative to one another or to some other part of the machine. Components involving linear or pivoting relative movement are abundant.
One type of machine having parts involving relative pivoting movement is known as a dragline, a type of excavating machine equipped with an extending boom from which is suspended a digging bucket. To excavate, the bucket is placed on the ground away from the machine. With its teeth rearward (facing the machine), such bucket is drawn (or "dragged") toward such machine by taut cable. When the bucket is filled, it is hoisted by other taut cables and the machine is then rotated to dump the bucket contents on a spoil pile.
During digging and later bucket emptying, such bucket must assume a variety of "attitudes," i.e., a horizontal position to dig and a steeply-angled or vertical position to empty. The hoisting cables are attached to chain-link "rigging" which, in turn, is attached to the bucket by U-shaped clevises. The use of such pivoting devises permits the bucket to be supported by the rigging and the hoisting cables and yet assume the positions required for digging and bucket emptying.
Bucket-clevis attachment is by a pivot pin extending through both "legs" of the clevis and through the bucket. The bucket, clevis and pin are subjected to extraordinary wear and impact. (In fact, it is difficult to envision the rigors of bucket service without actually having seen a dragline in operation.) By reason of such very hard service, it is preferred that the pin have a relatively-high hardness for longer pin life.
It is also important that the pivot pin be securely retained so that the bucket and clevis do not separate from one another. But when the pin is worn to the point that it must be replaced, the structure retaining such pin is preferably quick and easy to remove and replace. A large dragline may represent a capital expenditure of several million dollars--machine downtime is very expensive.
While generally satisfactory, prior art arrangements for retaining a pin have some deficiencies with respect to pin hardness (and consequent "wearability") and ease of pin replacement. In one arrangement, one end of the cylindrical pivot pin is fitted with a cap-like head that prevents such pin from working its way out of the clevis in one direction. Such head is welded to the pin. After the bucket and rigging are assembled in the field, a similar head is welded to the other end of the pin to prevent the pin from working its way out of the clevis in the other direction.
There are two disadvantages to this approach. One is that to replace a pin, one has to "cut" the welded head from at least one end of the pin (by using an acetylene torch, for example) and weld a head on an end of the replacement pin after such pin is installed. This is time consuming and requires that flame cutting equipment and a person skilled as a welder be available on the site.
Another disadvantage to the "welded head" approach is that the hardness of the pin cannot exceed some maximum, e.g., about 400-450 Brinell. A pin of such hardness does not wear as well as desired and it must be replaced with a frequency that, in view of the invention, is unnecessary.
Another approach to pin retention involves using a cylindrical pin without welded heads and mounting a cover at each side of the clevis and over each end of the pin. In a similar approach, the cover mounts tongue-and-groove fashion on straight tracks affixed to the clevis. After being properly positioned, the covers are welded in place. Examples of both approaches are disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,577,858 (Kasim et al.).
While this approach avoids pin welding (and therefore permits using a pin having a hardness of about 650 Brinell), it does or at least may not avoid welding altogether. As a consequence, the user of such approach is likely to experience at least some of the downtime and equipment and personnel problems mentioned above.
Still another way of retaining a pin in a clevis is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 4,221,252 (Bruce). In the locking arrangement of the Bruce patent, the main shackle pin has at least one end which is machined to have a reduced diameter. Such end is also machined to have a pocket axially receiving a plug which retains the locking pin crosswise in the main shackle pin. And the locking pin also has a tapered groove machined in it.
An improved pin-retaining structure and method which minimize the amount of machining required in manufacture, which avoid welding when installing or replacing a pin in the field, which reduce downtime and which involve only commonly-available tools and personnel skills would be an important advance in the art.